CHAPTER 5
Perception, Cognition, and
Emotion
Learning Objectives
1. Understand the role of perception, cognition, and
emotion (an emergent inquiry) in negotiation.
2. Learn about the 4 types of perceptual distortions
and 12 forms of cognitive biases (psychological
traps) and ways to reduce their adverse effects.
3. Know how mood, emotion and negotiation interact
with each other.
4. Develop (re-)framing skills, and proper use of
emotion as influence tactics.
Outline
1. Perception and Perceptual Distortion 知觉扭曲
2. Framing as an Advanced Negotiation Skill 框架
3. Cognitive Biases in Negotiation 认知偏差
4. Managing Mis-perceptions and Cognitive Biases in
Negotiation
5. Mood, Emotion, and Negotiation
6. Chapter Summary
7. Assignment
1. 1 Perception
• Figure 5.1 The Perceptual Process
Stimulus
Attention
Recognition
Translation
Behavior
Perception
• Perception is a “sense-making ” process; people
interpret their environment so that they can respond
appropriately.
1. 1 Perception
Perception Defined
Perception is the process by which individuals
connect to their environment. The process of
ascribing/assigning meaning to messages and
events is strongly influenced by the perceiver’s
current state of mind, role, and comprehension
of earlier communications.
Comment on the following observation by Robert
Burns:
To see ourselves as others see us!
1. 2 Perceptual Distortion
Perception Distortion In a given negotiation, the
perceiver’s own needs, desires, motivation, and
personal experiences may create a
predisposition about TOS. This is cause for
concern when it leads to biases and errors in
perception and subsequent communication.
1.2--- Four Types
Stereotyping+ Halo Effects (by generalization): common
hazards in negotiation
e.g. stereotyping (as a mould in printing): a few facts +
forced on everybody
Danger: a lazy way of categorizing people (short-cuts),
incurring potential cost. A pattern once formed is
persistent, and difficult to reverse (Acute problem!).
Selective Perception + Projection
(anticipation/prior belief + self-fulfilling)
1.2 ---Stereotyping and Halo Effects
By generalization
common hazards in negotiation
e.g. stereotyping (as a mould in printing): a few facts +
forced on everybody
Danger: a lazy way of categorizing people (short-cuts),
incurring potential cost. A pattern once formed is
persistent, and difficult to reverse (Acute problem!).
Sweeping generalizations (danger!)
• Heaven is where the cooks are French, the mechanics
are German, the policemen are English, the lovers are
Italian, and it is all organized by the Swiss.
• Hell is where the policemen are German, the mechanics
are French, the cooks are British, the lovers are Swiss,
and it is all organized by the Italians.
What’s the implication?
Case: Misinterpretation of John F. Kennedy by Khrushchev
Who is seen as a credible person?
Kennedy and Khrushchev’s talks in Vienna
• During their meeting, the young president JFK
recognized that to his regret, the US attack had been a
military and political mistake. Khrushchev saw this
confession of error as a testimony of JFK’s frank
naivety and lack of character. He therefore inferred that
it was possible to gain advantage by installing nuclear
missiles in Cuba. This led the world to the brink of
nuclear war btwn the superpowers. The events which
followed showed that Khrushchev had been wrong in
evaluating JFK’s credibility. Ultimately, JFK showed
great firmness and negotiation skill.
2. Framing as an Advanced Negotiation Skill
What is framing and why it is crucial in negotiation?
• As a subjective mechanism, a frame directs or orients
the reader/listener to examine a message with a certain
disposition or inclination. e.g. Our paralysis and fear is
our competitors’ greatest asset.
• Often two or more people in dispute see the
situation/problem/issue or define it in different ways.
• Understanding framing helps negotiators evaluate the
process, and better control it.
• Effective negotiators frame what they ask!
2.1 ---The psychology of Framing
Suppose contestants A and B competed on who could
complete the same jigsaw puzzle first. A third party buys
two copies of the same 350-piece puzzle, dumping the
contents of both boxes on a table in front of them. Who
will win?
Suppose a new condition were introduced: One of them
has access to the box with a picture of the completed
puzzle. Who will win, then?
Implications: Framing gives perspective, rationale, and
structure to what you want to say. Without the frame,
chaos prevails over coherence.
2.1 Types of Frames
(1) Substantive what the conflict is about.实质
(2) Outcome a party’s predisposition to achieving a specific
result or outcome. 结果
(3) Aspiration a predisposition toward satisfying a broader
set of interest or needs. 奢望
(4) Process how the parties will go about resolving their
dispute. 程序
(5) Identity how the parties define “who they are”.身份
(6) Characterization—how the parties define the other
parties.特征框架（效应）
(7) Loss-gain how the parties define the risk or reward 损益
2.2 How Frames Work in Negotiation
• Negotiators can use more than one frame.
• Mis-matches in frames between parties are sources of
conflict.
• Particular types of frames may lead to particular types
of agreements.
• Specific frames may be likely to be used with certain
types of issues.
• Parties are likely to assume a particular frame because
of various factors.
2.3 Alternative Frames: Interests, Right, and Power
• Parties have a choice about how they approach a
negotiation in terms of interests, rights, and power. (Box
7.1, p. 185, “利”、“理”、“力” )
• The same negotiation can be framed in different ways
and will likely lead to different consequences.
Illustration: The example of a student who has a dispute
with a local car repair shop shows that different frames
are very likely to lead to different discussions.
Box 5.1 Chinese Negotiation Frames (p.139)
(Focus: Misconception and cultural perspective)
2.4 The Frame of an Issue Changes as Negotiation Evolves
At least four factors can affect how the conversation is
shaped (pp.141-42):
(1) Negotiators tend to argue for stock issues, or
concerns that are raised every time the parties negotiate.
(2) Each party attempts to make the best possible case
for his or her preferred position or perspective.申辩
(3) Frames may define major shifts and transitions in a
complex overall negotiation.
(4) Multiple agenda items operate to shape issue
development.
2.5 Summary
Prescriptive advices about problem framing:
(1) Frames shape what the parties define as the key issues
and how they talk about them.
(2) Both parties have frames.
(3) Frames are controllable, at least to some degree.
(4) Conversations change and transform frames in ways
negotiators may not be able to predict but may be able
to control.
(5) Certain frames are more likely than others to lead to
certain types of processes and outcomes (the 80/20
rule)
3. Cognitive Biases in Negotiation-1
What are they? How to combat their negative effect?
3.1 Irrational Escalation of Commitment 承诺升级
It is an tendency for an individual to make decisions
that stick with a failing course of action.
Escalation of Commitment is due in part to biases in
individual perception and judgment.
One way to combat these tendencies is to have an
advisor to serve as a reality checkpoint.
3. Cognitive Biases in Negotiation-2
3.2 Mythical Fixed-Pie Belief
The tendency to see negotiation in fixed-pie terms
varies depending on how people view the nature of a
given conflict situation.
It can also be diminished by holding negotiators
accountable for the way the negotiate.负有责任
3. Cognitive Biases in Negotiation-3
• 3.3 Anchoring and Adjustment 锚定与调整
The choice of an anchor might well be based on faulty
or in-complete information and thus be mis-leading in
and of itself.
Through preparation, along with the use of devil’s
advocate or reality check, can help prevent errors .
3. Cognitive Biases in Negotiation-4
3.4 Issue Framing and Risk
The way an issue is framed influences how
negotiators perceive risk and behave in relation to it.
The tendency to either seek or avoid risk may be
based on the reference point against which offers
and concessions are judged.
3. Cognitive Biases in Negotiation-5
3.5 Availability of Information 可获得性
Negotiators must also be concerned with the potential
bias caused by the availability of information or how
easy information is to retrieve.
The availability of information also affects negotiation
through the use of established search patterns.
3. Cognitive Biases in Negotiation-6
3.6 The Winner’s Curse 赢家诅咒
The winner’s curse refers to the tendency of negotiators
to settle quickly on a item and then subsequently feel
dis-content about a negotiation win that comes too
easily.
Case：Dissatisfaction from a Clock Purchase (p.148)
The best remedy for winner’s curse is to prevent it from
occurring.
3. Cognitive Biases in Negotiation-7
3.7 Over-confidence
It is the tendency of negotiators to believe that their
ability to be correct or accurate is greater than is
actually true. It has a double-edged effect.
It appears that negotiators have a tendency to be
overconfident about their own abilities and that this
overconfident affects a wide variety of perceptions and
behaviors.
3. Cognitive Biases in Negotiation-8
3.8 The Law of Small Numbers 小数法则/定律
It applies to the way negotiators learn and extra-polate
from their own experience.
The implications of the example of “hot hand ” fallacy?
(p. 149, 热手谬误): A win or loss is not correlated with
the outcome of a preceding game under random
conditions.
Remember that the more limited the negotiation
experience, the greater the possibility that past lessons
will be erroneously used to infer what will happen in the
future.
3. Cognitive Biases in Negotiation-9
3.9 Self-Serving Biases 自利偏差
Fundamental Attribution Error 基本归因偏差
The effects of self-serving biases 自我偏差
Self-serving biases have recently been shown to
influence perceptions of fairness in a negotiation
context.
Perceptual error may also be expressed in the
form of biases or distortions in the evaluation of data.
3. Cognitive Biases in Negotiation-10
3.10 Endowment Effect 资源禀赋
It is the tendency to over-value something you
own or believe you possess.
In negotiation, the endowment effect can lead to
inflated estimations of value that interfere with
reaching a good deal.
3. Cognitive Biases in Negotiation-11
3.11 Ignoring Other’s Cognitions (p. 151)
The drive to ignore others’ cognitions is very deepseated.
Efforts to ask about others’ perceptions and thoughts
and form an accurate understanding of their interests,
goals, and perspectives will pay off, e.g. making the
complex task of decision making under conditions of
risk and uncertainty more manageable.
3. Cognitive Biases in Negotiation-12
3.12 Reactive De-valuation
It is the process of de-valuing the other party’s
concessions simply because the other party made them.
Such devaluation may be based in emotionality (“I just
don’t like him”) or on dis-trust fostered by past
experience.
Counter-measures: 1) maintain an objective view of the
process; 2) assign a colleague to do this task (cartoon, p.
154); 3) clarify each side’s preferences on options and
concessions before any are made; 4) use a third party to
mediate or filter concession-making processes.
4. Managing Misperceptions and Cognitive Biases
• They typically arise out of conscious awareness as
negotiators gather and process information.
Alert! Box 5.4 (p.153) presents a sizeable inventory of
the variety of decision traps that can occur in
Negotiation. Any Questions?
Countermeasures: 1) Merely discussing how to set
opening offers, aspiration levels, and bottom lines
with team members will not reduce the effects of
perceptual biases. 2) Careful discussion of the issues
and preferences by both negotiators may reduce the
effects of perceptual biases.
4 Reframing---More demanding
Box 5.5 Deal-crafting and Re-framing(p.156）
1-Dimension: “at the table” process
2D: “deal-crafting”
3D: change the rules of the game itself; “-reset the ‘table’
to yield the best possible outcome”, ie reframing a
negotiation encounter
What’s the point here?
(also Table 3.1 Re-focusing Questions to Reveal WinWin Options, p. 86)
(for more, visit the course-site, see Assignment slide)
5. Mood and Emotion in negotiation
• Emergent area of inquiry The role of mood and
emotion in negotiation has been the subject of an
increasing body of recent theory research.
• Related but distinct The distinction is based on
three characteristics: specificity, intensity, and
duration.
5. … Some Selected Findings
5.1 Negotiations Create Posi/Nega-tive Emotions (p. 156)
Consensus: Emotions tend to move the parties toward
some of action in their relationship, such as initiating a
relationship, maintaining or fixing the relationship, or
terminating the relationship.
Dejection-related emotions沮丧---act aggressively
Agitation-related emotions焦虑---try to retaliate or to
withdraw
5. … Some Selected Findings
5.2 Positive Emotions and Positive Consequences
Positive feelings 1) more likely lead the parties toward
more integrative processes; 2) also create a positive
attitude toward TOS; 3) promote persistence.
Then, what aspects of the negotiation process are
conducive to positive emotions?
Maybe fair procedures, favorable social comparisons.
5. ---Some Selected Findings
5.3 Negative Emotion and Negative Consequences
Negative emotions may 1) lead parties to define the
situation as competitive or distributive; 2)
undermine a negotiator’s ability to analyze the
situation accurately; 3）lead parties to escalate the
conflict; 4）lead parties to retaliate, thus possibly
thwarting integrative outcomes.
Then, what aspects of the Negotiation Process can
lead to negative emotion?
Perhaps, a competitive mindset or impasse.
5. ---Some Selected Findings
5.4 The Effects of Posi&Negative Emotion in Negotiation.
Positive feelings may have negative consequences and
negative feelings may create positive outcomes (p.
159）
5.5 Emotions Used Strategically as Negotiation Gambits
技巧
Given the power that emotions may have in swaying
TOS toward one’s own point of view, emotions may
also be used strategically and manipulatively as
influence tactics within negotiation.
6. Chapter Summary
From a negotiation learner’s perspective
1. Learn about the insightful findings of psychological
beings, and watch out “psychological traps”
2. Know that misconceptions abound, esp. across cultures
and cultural perspectives matter.
3. Remember that effective negotiators need the capacity
to manage “cool” and “hot” issues proactively and
appropriately.
7 Assignment (visit the course site for more
information)
李岩梅、刘长江、李纾（2007）.认知、动机、情感因素对谈判
行为的影响，心理科学进展 15(3): 511-517.
李锐、李爱梅、凌文辁（2008）. 承诺续扩现象及其心理机制，
心理科学进展 16(5):767-778.
Sussman, Lyle(1999). How to frame a message: the art of
persuasion and negotiation, Business Horizons,
案例欣赏Dialogue: Reframe negativity in a positive light
案例欣赏Case: Americans’ sorry negotiation with their
Mexican counterparts
Appendix 4: North American and European behaviors: how
they see each other?
Video clips (2): Bridging the gap